Thanks, Bruce! For the areas that need to be refined: These are areas where the group has already seen proposals, which just need some tweaking. For the areas that need to be considered: These would be parts where the group has not seen draft language at all, e.g. on human rights. Best, Thomas
Am 14.10.2015 um 04:18 schrieb Bruce Tonkin <Bruce.Tonkin@melbourneit.com.au>:
Thanks Thomas, very helpful.
Is it possible to get a definition of the meaning of the status “to be considered” and “to be refined”.
I am guessing that a rough match to the Board’s terminology is that a “to be considered’ is a 1B and “to be refined” is a 1A – but just want to check.
Thanks, Bruce Tonkin
<> From: accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Rickert Sent: Tuesday, 13 October 2015 10:48 PM To: Accountability Cross Community <accountability-cross-community@icann.org> Subject: [CCWG-ACCT] Scorecard for Dublin
All, Mathieu has kindly updated a Google doc he had prepared some time ago.
It is a scorecard displaying the various areas of work and their respective completion status.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HcUUDn5DHSVo7lLo-FWU_QMa8PGgfZWTP_kG... <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HcUUDn5DHSVo7lLo-FWU_QMa8PGgfZWTP_kG...>
There's a lot of yellow "to be refined" which we should be able to turn into green in Dublin.
Kind regards, Thomas
_______________________________________________ Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community@icann.org> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community <https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community>